Automation in Construction 9 Ž2000.

315–328
www.elsevier.comrlocaterautcon

A concept of space for building classification, product modelling,

and design
A. Ekholm ) , S. Fridqvist
Department of Building and Architecture, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund UniÕersity, P.O. Box 118, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden

Abstract

Information about a building’s spaces is of interest in every stage of the construction and facility management processes.
An organisation 1 or enterprise is located in and uses the building’s spaces, and many of the building’s spatial properties are
determined on the basis of the user organisation’s requirements. The definition of the concept ‘‘space’’ as applied in
information systems for building classification and building product modelling today is unclear. A fundamental problem is to
reconcile a material and construction method viewpoint with a space-centred viewpoint. In order to enable communication
among actors and computer systems in the construction process, the concepts used in model development and the
corresponding terms have to be formally defined and standardised. In this article, we analyse the concept of space and
suggest a comprehensive definition for the construction context. The identification of a space in a building is based on a
spatial view. We introduce the concept of aspectual unit and show how this concept can be used to integrate different aspect
views in a conceptual schema. Additionally, we define the user organisation as a thing, which is separate from the building
and has spatial properties of its own, so-called ‘‘activity spaces’’. Finally, we show how space may be represented in a
comprehensive conceptual schema. q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Activity space; Aspectual unit; Aspect view; Building; CAD; Classification; Construction; Product modelling; Space; Spatial
modelling; User organisation

1. Introduction infants we learn to know the extension of our own

body and how it is spatially related to external things
1.1. Background and purpose of the study w22x. A space is by most of us thought of as an empty
volume, enclosed in some respect — materially or
1.1.1. The eÕeryday understanding of space experientially. For example, an air-raid shelter is
Space is one of the basic concepts by which we materially enclosed to air, light and intrusion, and
refer to the material world. We observe the world of even from shells, by thick walls of concrete; most of
things and how they surround us and we perceive us experience a feeling of compact enclosedness in
these as constituting some kind of space. Already as such a space. In contrast with this, space at other
times is more subtle and may lack material bound-
aries, still we may experience a spatial demarcation,
) as for example when we divide a beach into sun-
Tel.: q46-222-41-63; fax: q46-13-83-58; e-mail:
[email protected]
bathing spaces and walking paths. Here the enclosing
1
In this text, the term ‘user organisation’ denotes the users of a boundary is more subjective and often culturally
building, their activities and the equipment used. dependent.

0926-5805r00r$ - see front matter q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 6 - 5 8 0 5 Ž 9 9 . 0 0 0 1 3 - 8
316 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328

The everyday understanding of space may be ing to their functions w16x, but the concept is some-
self-evident and unproblematic. However, as soon as times defined without reference to a material sub-
we are asked for a formal definition, e.g., in the stance that may contribute to the function w12x. Most
context of building classification or product mod- building product modelling projects lack an explicit
elling, the concept of space is subject of controversy. definition of the concept ‘‘space’’, see e.g., the
To some, space is the emptiness in which things are ¨ w1x, Eastman and Siabiris w6x, COM-
works of Bjork
embedded, i.e., an entity with an immaterial exis- BINE w20x and the Building Construction Core
tence. To others, space has no separate existence but Model, of STEP w15x. More detailed accounts for the
is a property, alongside others, of the material world. two former works are presented in Sections 3.2.1 and
3.2.2, respectively.
1.1.2. Space in the construction context It is of interest to view the building both as
Space has become an important concept in com- composed of spaces in different scales, and as com-
puter-based information systems, both for the build- posed of material entities of different complexity.
ing construction process w1x and the facility manage- The problem of co-ordinating the different view-
ment process w24x. An organisation or enterprise is points in a product model is recognised by Bjork¨ w1x
located in and uses the building’s spaces. Many of Žp. 206. who states that ‘‘A basic dilemma in many
the building’s spatial properties are determined on product models seems to be to reconcile the material
the basis of user organisation requirements. This is to and construction method viewpoint with the space-
a large extent done early in the design process, centred viewpoint’’. The problem of integrating these
independently of and before the loadbearing struc- separate views has also been dealt with by Eastman
ture or the installation systems are determined. If and Siabiris w6x Žsee Section 3.2..
computer-aided modelling is to be introduced at Another problem with contemporary building
these early stages, it is necessary that spatial proper- product models, e.g., the models of Bjork ¨ w1x and
ties of the building can be represented before other Industry Alliance for Interoperability ŽIAI. w10x, is
properties are determined. It is also necessary to the uncertainty caused by the absence of a separate
observe the difference between the organisation’s entity for the user organisation and therefore the lack
spatial properties or ‘‘activity spaces’’ and the spa- of a clear distinction between the spatial properties
tial properties of the built environment w8x. of the building on the one hand and of the user
In order to enable communication among actors organisation on the other hand.
and computer systems in the construction process,
the concepts used in model development have to be 1.1.3. The aim of this research
formally defined and standardised. This is also The aim of the research presented here is to deal
recognised in the development of domain specific with the dilemma of reconciling the material and
standards, and information models based on these construction method viewpoint with the space-centred
standards, by among others ISO TC59rSC13 w12x, viewpoint, observed by Bjork,¨ and show how this
and STEP w13x, both working committees of the can be dissolved by building a concept of space on
International Standardization Organization ŽISO.. In the basis of an explicit ontological framework. In
our opinion, information models must not only be this article, we propose a generic solution to the
based on standardised concepts, but they should also problem, that makes it possible to represent space as
be scientifically true representations of the universe a property of things, in this case of buildings and
of discourse. Such models will have a long lifespan their parts, as well as of user organisations and their
as well as a high degree of versatility. For a repre- ‘‘activity units’’. The referents 2 of this concept of
sentation to be scientifically true, it must adhere to
scientific knowledge.
The definition of the concept ‘‘space’’ as applied 2
The referents of a concept are members of the class deter-
in information systems for building classification and mined by the concept. They may be concrete, i.e., things, or
building product modelling today is unclear. In abstract, i.e., other concepts. The former concepts are called
building classification, spaces are classified accord- factual and the latter abstract, or formal w2x.
 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328 317

space are things, e.g., building elements, and user relation among material objects, and finally in Ž4.
organisations. and Ž5. space is a thing with certain spatial proper-
We believe that our definition of space will help ties.
in creating and using information systems that are in The idea of the existence of absolute space, i.e.,
accordance with the scientific view of space, and as something with an existence separate from things,
relevant to the information needs of the construction was strongly advocated by Newton, but just as au-
sector. thoritatively objected by his contemporary opponent
Leibniz. With the emergence of the theory of relativ-
1.2. Disposition of this article ity, from Mach to Einstein, the idea of absolute
space or space as a container was abandoned from
Section 1 of the article has discussed the use of modern science together with the Ether theory w18x
the concept of space in different contexts. Section 2 Žp. 142.. The generally accepted view of space within
develops a definition of the concept of space based science today, is as a relation between things. The
on ontological theory. Section 3 of the article dis- view of space as a purely mathematical concept is
cusses the use of the concept of space in some not considered in the present investigation although
influential scientific papers and in some important it has important applications in computer-based
standardisation efforts concerning spatial modelling three-dimensional modelling.
in the construction context. In Section 4 a framework
for building space information that can be applied in 2.1.2. Space as a thing or as a property of a thing
information systems for building modelling and de- — a semantic duality
sign is presented. The framework expresses how According to semantic theory, a concept both
space related concepts from the previous sections refers and represents w2x. Reference is a relation
can be represented in a consistent way. Finally, between a concept and an object. The reference
conclusions of the work are drawn in Section 5. function of a concept is to direct attention to objects,
for example the concept ‘‘horse’’ refers to all horses.
Representation is a relation between a concept and
2. Definition of space properties of an object. For example, the concept
‘‘ velocity’’, termed Õ, represents a body’s speed of
2.1. The concept of space movement expressed as the relation travelled dis-
tancertime. Concepts that mainly represent are called
2.1.1. Different concepts of space attributes, while concepts that mainly refer can be
The Latin term spatium designates several differ- called ‘‘object’’-concepts. This dualism of concepts
ent concepts like ‘‘area’’, ‘‘room’’, and ‘‘interval of is useful in natural language, since it allows us to
space or time’’ w25x. Neither in the old Latin lan- conceptually separate between a thing and its proper-
guage nor in everyday speech today does the term ties, e.g., in investigating some unknown thing. The
space have a single or clear-cut meaning. According same dualism may cause confusion in formal mod-
to dictionaries like Collins w5x and Webster’s w25x, a elling, where a concept sometimes may be used as a
space may be, for example: Ž1. the unlimited three- object-concept and sometimes as an attribute.
dimensional expanse in which all material objects An attribute that mainly represents also refers to
are located, Ž2. an interval of distance or time be- those objects that have the property represented by
tween two points, objects, or events, Ž3. a blank the attribute. Therefore, attributes may be used as
portion or area, Ž4. an unoccupied area or room, and object-concepts. For example, we often name things
Ž5. a seat or place Žaccommodations on a public after an important or especially apparent property,
vehicle.. These concepts reveal different understand- e.g., a cylinder-shaped thing might be called ‘‘cylin-
ings of space. According to definition Ž1., space is der’’. The concept ‘‘space’’ has a similar function
some kind of ‘‘container’’, e.g., the Universe, with since it on the one hand refers to something material,
an existence independent of material objects. In defi- and on the other hand represents the void enclosed
nitions Ž2. and Ž3. space is a geometrical concept, a by matter. Depending on the context, the meaning of
318 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328

the concept ‘‘space’’ can be towards either reference

or representation.
A spatial relation is a mutual property of two or
more things, and may also be called a separation
relation; it is non-bonding, i.e., it does not affect the
states of the related things w3x Žp. 296.. The idea that
spatial relations are properties of things is consistent
Fig. 1. Void, or space, as a mutual property of an aggregate of
with the axiom that properties have no existence things, and as an intrinsic property of a single thing.
separate from things; therefore, without things there
are no spatial relations and accordingly no ‘‘space’’.
Spatial properties can be viewed as intrinsic or
mutual, depending on the demarcation of the studied
things. For example, if a thing composed of several 2.1.3. Space in the construction context
parts encloses a void, then this void, or space, is a The purpose of buildings are to accommodate
mutual property of the parts. The size of the void is user organisations and their equipment, and enable
determined by the relative position of the parts. On their activities. The building’s function during an
the other hand, if we disregard the parts, and view activity is its relation to the physical environment
the thing as a single whole, then void, or space, is an and the users. The building protects from intruders,
intrinsic property Žsee Fig. 1.. wind and rain, and it provides the user with, among
Spatial extension, e.g., area or volume, is a prop- others, a suitable indoor climate, technical services,
erty of things including processes. A process is a and a steady platform for the activities. The relation
system that goes through a sequence of events. Also between the user and the building is mediated through
processes have spatial extension, e.g., a rotating the spaces where the activities take place. The activ-
propeller with its sweeping area, or an aeroplane ity that the user organisation performs is to a certain
with its flight corridor. extent made possible by the building, and to this
The enclosing parts of a space are also called extent the activity is a mutual property of the users
boundary, or shell. A boundary may be factual or and the building.
experiential. 3 A factual space has factual bound- We define construction works, or alternatively
aries that may be enclosing to some things and open construction entities, 4 as large artefacts which re-
to others; the panes of glass of the aquarium encloses quire a ground foundation, they are artificial environ-
water but lets through light, and the bars of a cage ments to man’s activities or artefacts, with specific,
keeps a tiger enclosed while a mouse easily slips functional and experiential properties. A building is a
through. Experiential space is a mutual property of specific kind of construction entity designed to be
the thing and an experiencing observer. An experien- enclosing to climate, intruders or other agents.
tial space has more or less objective or subjective Based on similar ideas as presented here, Ekholm
boundaries, depending on the degree of correspon- w7x has proposed a definition of space in the con-
dence between the experienced and the factual struction context. However, a more comprehensive
boundaries.

4
According to ISO w16x, a construction entity is ‘‘an indepen-
dent material construction result of significant scale serving at
3
This dichotomy is based on the presupposition that factual least one user activity or function’’. A construction complex is
properties exist independently of an observer, while experiential, ‘‘two or more construction entities serving one or more user
or phenomenal, properties depend on interpretation. The experien- activity or function’’. In another ISO document w17x, construction
tial properties may be more or less objective, i.e., they correspond works is defined as ‘‘everything that is constructed or results from
more or less with the factual properties w3x. construction operations’’.
 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328 319

definition is suggested here. According to the consid-

erations above, a space in the construction context is:
An aggregate of things, including construction enti-
ties or their parts, with a materially or experientially
enclosed Õoid that may accommodate users or equip-
ment.
A room in a building is a space with a free void
that is large enough to accommodate users and
equipment; the building parts that make up the space
are enclosing, e.g., to climate, light, sound, or fire. A
building space may also be experientially enclosing,
i.e., dependent on a person’s interpretation. An office
space may have floor, ceiling and furniture, e.g., a
bookshelf or a screen, but no walls; still it is experi- Fig. 2. User organisation with activity spaces and spatial relations.
enced as an enclosed space.
A building as a whole may be seen as one single
space composed of the accommodating and climati-
cally enclosing parts. Alternatively, a building can be
seen as divided into smaller spaces, e.g., apartments are of different scale, from the smallest, defined by
and stairwells composed of apartment dividing parts, the human body and the used tools, to the space
or the even smaller rooms within apartments like determined by an organisation as a whole. In human
bedroom and kitchen composed of internal and ex- activities, e.g., an individual’s job, the reach and
ternal walls, floor and ceiling. body characteristics belong to the key determining
Being physical things, composed of building parts, factors. Typical building space dimensioning hand-
the building’s spaces have many of the factual and books start with human body characteristics, see e.g.,
experiential properties that characterise the building the book by Neufert w21x. The spatial extension of a
as a whole, e.g., functional properties like enclosing, work unit, composed of individuals with their tools
servicing and furnishing, and experiential properties and equipment, also depends on the material used in
like experiential space, architectural style, and beauty. the process and the resulting products. Persons,
In building classification systems, spaces are classi- equipment and material may change position and
fied by their main function in relation to the user. A dimension over time which makes the activity space
space function program developed in architectural time-dependent.
programming contains functional and experiential In the design process it is of interest to be able to
requirements on the building’s spaces, e.g., concern- handle information about the user organisation sepa-
ing surface materials and colour, fire resistance and rately from information about the building. For ex-
sound reduction levels. ample, in the earliest stages of the process a neces-
sary task is to describe the organisation and its
activities in order to be able to determine the organi-
2.1.4. User actiÕity space sation’s requirements on the building. In another
The concept ‘‘user activity space’’ is relevant to context we have developed principles for represent-
this analysis of the concept ‘‘space’’ and its applica- ing the user organisation in information systems for
tion to the construction context. An organisation has building product modelling and design w8,9x. With
a spatial extension traditionally called actiÕity space the emphasis on spatial properties, Eastman and
Žsee Fig. 2.. Siabiris w6x have developed principles for represent-
An activity space is the spatial extension of the ing user activities in information systems. With simi-
process of performing an activity, it is derived from lar objectives, Maher et al. w19x have developed
the shapes and positions of the organisation’s parts principles for formalising information about activi-
during the duration of the activity. Activity spaces ties including their spatial properties.
320 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328

3. Concepts of space in building classification and sic void, or space, that may accommodate users or
product modelling equipment, within or otherwise associated with a
building or other construction entity. A space may be
3.1. Space in building classification bounded physically or notionally’’.

3.1.1. ISO construction classification 3.1.2. Industry Alliance for Interoperability

A building’s spaces are designed for occupancy The IAI has the purpose to enable interoperability
by, e.g., users, machinery and other equipment. In among different AEC software applications. This has
current work within construction classification such committed the organisation to develop the so-called
spaces are classified by their basic function 5 in Industry Foundation Classes, IFC w10x Žpp. 1–5., ‘‘as
relation to the users and other agents; examples of a basis for information sharing through the project
classes are office and communication spaces, and life-cycle, globally, across disciplines and technical
climate- and fire-zones. In this context a factual applications’’.
concept of space with reference to material things is In the usage scenario for IFC by IAI w10x Žp. 3-1.
needed. the idea of bubble-diagrams for space layout is ap-
However, in some earlier ISO definitions the con- plied. According to IAI, space bubbles represent
cept of space is referentially somewhat unclear, e.g., spaces of the building, which can be arranged by the
the ISO Technical Report TR 14177 quotes a defini-
designer until he finds a satisfactory floor plan. The
tion given in ISO 6707-1:1989 ‘‘Building and Civil
possibility that the bubbles may represent user actiÕ-
Engineering — Vocabulary’’ which states that a
ity spaces is missing in the scenario. The criteria for
space is ‘‘an area or volume bounded actually or
defining the size and relationship between these bub-
theoretically’’ w12x. The definition describes a void,
bles are the activities, and not the building’s spaces
but without reference to material constituents with
themselves. The purpose of this remark is just to
potential function, which is the basis for classifying
remind that the construction and facility management
the space. In the proposed standard, based on the
processes deal not only with building information
Technical Report, the definition has been elaborated
but also with user organisation information. This is
so that the material reference is clearer. The adopted
especially apparent in the programming and opera-
view is that space is a: ‘‘Three-dimensional, material
tion stages of the processes, often overlooked by
construction result, contained within, or otherwise
builders w8x.
associated with, a building or other construction
Release 1.5 of IFC w11x, apply a similar definition
entity. A space may be bounded physically or no-
of space as that in ISO 6707-1:1989 ‘‘Building and
tionally’’ w16x. Civil Engineering — Vocabulary’’ namely: ‘‘A
This definition explicitly states that space is some- Space represents an area or volume bounded actually
thing material, a construction result. In comparison or theoretically. Spaces are areas or volumes that
with the definition in the Technical Report, this can provide for certain functions within a building’’. Just
be understood as a clarification. This aside, the as with this ISO-definition the material parts which
definition is not precise enough since the definition make up the space are missing.
is also true for a wall or a slab. According to the
definition, an additional property of a space is that it
leaves a void, or space, that may accommodate users 3.2. Space in product modelling
or equipment. Using similar words as in Section
2.1.3, the definition could be reformulated as fol- The dilemma of accommodating both a material
lows: ‘‘A material construction result with an intrin- and a spatial view in schemas has been dealt with
¨ w1x and Eastman and Siabiris w6x. In
both by Bjork
this section, we analyse the concepts of space ap-
5
A function is a mutual property among things, based on
plied by these authors. The aim of our analyses is not
bonding relations. Things with bonding relations affect each other’s to question the functionality of their schemas, but to
state w3,4x. see whether space in these schemas could just as
 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328 321

¨
Fig. 3. To the left, basic concepts in Bjork’s schema, c.f., Fig. 12 of Ref. w1x. To the right, our suggested addition to ensure consistency with
the material view of space.

well be modelled the way we consider more appro- ‘‘user activity space’’ is needed to represent spatial
priate, i.e., in accordance with our definition, see properties of the organisation.
Section 2.1.3. In his article, Bjork ¨ develops a set of require-
ments on a conceptual schema for space information,
3.2.1. A conceptual model of spaces, space bound- drawing from an analysis of product models devel-
aries and enclosing structures oped by himself and other authors. Bjork ¨ w1x Žp. 205.
In the following, we make a limited analysis of concludes that the concepts ‘‘space’’, ‘‘space bound-
central concepts in the article of Bjork ¨ w1x, ‘‘A ary’’ and ‘‘shell’’ are required, and relates these as
conceptual model of spaces, space boundaries and follows: ‘‘ . . . each space is enclosed in a
enclosing structures’’. The discussion of the concepts ‘shell’ . . . the physically continuous separating struc-
is based on the definition of space made here in tures Žwalls, floors. . . . are behind this shell’’. Fur-
Section 2.1.3. thermore, ‘‘ . . . the visual surface patches correspond
In defining the concept of space, Bjork ¨ w1x Žp. exactly to the inner dimensions of the spaces facing
204. states that ‘‘There are two complimentary ways these structures. The term space boundary will be
of defining a space. One is based on the complete used to denote the parts of this shell’’. Our highly
physical separation of the space from other spaces by reduced version of the schema developed by Bjork ¨ is
physical obstacles which provide visual, acoustic and presented to the left in Fig. 3. 6 In Bjork’s
¨ original
inner climate shelter. Another way of defining space schema the term shell is not used.
is as the locus of a homogeneous activity’’. Although this is not explicitly stated, Bjork’s ¨
The former concept of space by Bjork ¨ w1x Žp. 206. schema allows an enclosing entity to be an aggre-
is equivalent to the attribute ‘‘ void’’ introduced in gate, e.g., consist of walls, floors and ceilings as an
Section 2.1.2. The physical obstacles are also called ensemble. This aggregate may be a room, an apart-
enclosing structures, which ‘‘by their spatial ar-
rangement forms the spaces’’. From this statement it
6
¨ understands spaces as properties
is clear that Bjork The framework diagrams in this paper are developed in
of the physical ‘‘obstacles’’. EXPRESS-G, the graphical counterpart of EXPRESS, a formal
language which was developed to be used within STEP w23x. In an
¨ w1x Žp. 204. reminds that ‘‘functional spaces
Bjork EXPRESS-G schema, boxes are entities, that represent either real
are important to architects in the early stages of world objects or properties of such objects. The thick lines
design’’. It is important to recognise that the concept between entities show supertype–subtype relations. The thin lines
‘‘functional space’’ actually could refer to the social are attributes, which when they relate two ‘object’ entities repre-
organisation using the building. The concept ‘‘func- sent a unidirectional relation between them, and in the case of an
‘object’ entity and a ‘property’ entity represent an attribute of the
tional space’’ represents the accumulated geometri- ‘object’ entity. The letter S and square brackets indicate a one-to-
cal extension of the organisation during an activity many relation, where the figures indicate the lower and upper
Žsee Section 2.1.4.. Thus, a separate concept named limits of the cardinality.
322 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328

ment, or a whole building, seen as a spatial entity. is not altogether consistent throughout the first and
This level of composition seems to be missing in third parts of the paper. The model is based on four
¨
Bjork’s discussion, although his schema still allows interrelated concepts w6x Žp. 286.:
our interpretation since the enclosing entity very well 1. BUILDING, the top-level concept. A building is
may be such an aggregate. defined through the three interrelated concepts of
According to the property theory presented in constructed_form, bounded_space and activity.
Section 2.1.2, an imaginary space boundary is a 2. CONSTRUCTED_FORM, material used in con-
more subjective experiential property of a space. A struction of the building: bricks, glass, mechani-
space may be experienced as enclosed although there cal equipment etc. In the EDM implementation
is no enclosure preventing a person to pass through. the term ‘‘constructed_space’’ is used; we con-
Such a space boundary may at first seem imaginary clude that these terms are equivalent.
but is often indicated by some physical entity, e.g., a 3. BOUNDED_SPACE, supported and bounded by
slight difference of floor or ceiling height, or a CONSTRUCTED_FORM, defining areas of hu-
change of surface material or colour. In Bjork’s ¨ man occupancy and use, and
schema our view could be illustrated by a reference 4. ACTIVITY, general Že.g., business lease space.
from Imaginary space boundary to Enclosing entity. and specific Že.g., obstetrics ward..
It is questionable whether purely subjective imagi- These three concepts are related in a further
nary space is relevant to represent in a conceptual discussion where CONSTRUCTED_FORM and
schema. ACTIVITY are seen as ‘‘independent areas of
knowledge’’. They ‘‘are mediated through the
BOUNDED_SPACEs, the boundary definitions that
3.2.2. A generic building product model incorporat- provide envelopes for the ACTIVITYs, defined by
ing building type information the CONSTRUCTED_FORM’’. CONSTRUCTED_
In the paper ‘‘A generic building product model FORM are ‘‘bounding entities whose surfaces serve
incorporating building type information’’, Eastman as the interface between the building construction
and Siabiris w6x present a set of concepts with the and the internal spaces’’ w6x Žp. 287..
intention ‘‘to provide a flexible kernel, upon which ACTIVITYs are self-contained entities, separate
various building typologies, construction technolo- from the building’s material composition. Addition-
gies or stylistic criteria can later be added’’. After an ally, ACTIVITYs form a necessary part of the com-
introduction, the paper is divided into three parts, plete description of a building. They are defined as
where the first is a discussion of the conceptual ‘‘the conceptual definition of human activity that are
foundation, the second part is a presentation of the to be housed within the building’’. Furthermore, ‘‘At
EDM modelling structure, and the third is an imple- the coarsest level, they are simply named and de-
mentation of the concepts in EDM. The terminology fined in terms of rough area. They may be further

Fig. 4. An analysis of basic concepts in Eastman’s and Siabiris’ article.

 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328 323

specified with regard to furniture and fixed equip- 4.1. Theoretical background
ment and necessary environmental conditions’’.
‘‘Activities are assigned to BOUNDED_SPACEs’’ 4.1.1. Space and functional systems as aspectual
w6x Žp. 288..
units of a construction entity
The BOUNDED_SPACEs ‘‘provide the concep- To adopt a view, or aspect, of a thing is to
tual and formational link between a building’s observe a specific set of properties. A functional
CONSTRUCTED_FORM and its ACTIVITYs’’ w6x view focuses on a thing’s bonding relations to the
Žp. 287.. ‘‘BOUNDED_SPACEs are the enclosed
environment and on parts that contribute to the thing’s
regions within a building that are available to function. A compositional view of a thing identifies
accept human activity, bounded on all sides. The the compositional parts from which the thing is
boundaries modulate the dimensions of light, color assembled. A spatial view focuses on spatial proper-
and texture, thermal energy and so forth, defining ties Žsee Fig. 5..
the properties of the space enclosed. The CON- A functional view gives no clear indication of the
STRUCTED_FORM provides these properties . . . ’’. compositional parts of the system, and vice versa,
‘‘A building is made up of at least one and possibly since the same compositional part can have many
many BOUNDED_SPACEs’’ w6x Žp. 289.. different properties and can be part of many different
In the EDM modelling environment, ACTIVI- functional systems. Spatial relations may be consid-
TYs, BOUNDED_SPACE and CONSTRUCTED_ ered in both compositional and functional views, but
FORM are all represented as solid shape models. they may also be regarded per se, as a separate view
ACTIVITYs are located within BOUNDED_ on the system.
SPACEs, CONSTRUCTED_FORM has place be- Information about spaces is useful during all stages
tween BOUNDED_SPACEs w6x Žp. 294.. CON- of the construction process; during design, when the
STRUCTED_FORM defines the materials, place- user requirements on the building are specified, dur-
ment of doors and windows on the building. The ing production, when work activities and building
concepts and their relations are interpreted by us in material are located in the building’s spaces, and
the following EXPRESS-G schema Žsee Fig. 4.. during the use and maintenance stage, when user
The concept CONSTRUCTED_FORM may refer activities and facility maintenance concern the spaces.
to any artefact that forms a space, e.g., a building or An application for space planning, e.g., a CAD-pro-
a part of a building, including a space as a space-for- gram, should use the same construction entity parts
ming aggregate of building elements. Our concept of database as other applications, e.g., energy and quan-
space should be understood as a kind of CON- tity calculation systems. This would be possible to
STRUCTED_FORM, and the concept BOUNDED_ achieve with a representation of the building’s spaces
SPACE seems equivalent to our concept of void, i.e., as aspectual units of the construction entity.
the empty volume devoid of enclosing entities in a An aspect is a view on a thing, regarding a
space. The concept of ACTIVITY is equivalent to specific set of properties. An aspectual unit is a part
our idea of the user organisation. of a larger whole, it is composed of those of the

4. A schema for space in the construction context

In the introduction of this article we reminded of

¨
Bjork’s statement about the dilemma in many prod-
uct models to reconcile the material and construction
method viewpoint with the space-centred viewpoint.
This section presents our view of how these view-
points can be accommodated in the same schema. Fig. 5. Functional compositional and spatial views on a system.
324 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328

larger whole’s parts that contribute to the properties compositional parts is indicated by the asterisk indi-
of this aspect. Examples of aspectual units of build- cating a constraint on the composition of Aspectual
ings are functional systems, spaces or other aggre- unit in Fig. 6.
gates, for example based on colour or texture. The
schema in Fig. 6 illustrates how different aspects of
the same thing can be related to the composition of 4.1.2. Shape
the thing. Most things have a characteristic geometric ap-
Concurrent engineering requires that different ex- pearance, or shape. Shape is a clearly delimited
perts can view a construction entity model from their external boundary of a thing w3x. A shape may be
own aspect. The schema can be used as a mechanism described through a ‘‘geometric representation item’’,
to integrate such different aspect models. For exam- e.g., the standard constructive solid geometry, CSG,
ple, one representation might concern rooms for primitives cone, cylinder, sphere, torus, block, and
occupancy and another would concern the loadbear- right_angular_wedge, or through a combination of
ing structure. The former representation would only these w14x Žp. 167. Žsee Fig. 7..
include space enclosing parts, while the latter would Shapes are determined through specific attributes,
only include structural members. However, some of e.g., a CSG cylinder may have position, height and
the parts might be the same in both models, there- radius, its volume may be explicit or derived. A
fore, mechanisms that assist in co-ordinating must be shape may be described as composed of other shapes.
implemented. This task would be facilitated if the A pipe may be represented by two CSG cylinders,
aspect models are related according to the principle one intrinsic determining the void and one extrinsic
shown here. determining the deplacement. The shape of an aggre-
A compositional whole is by definition composed gate thing is based on the shapes of its constituent
of its compositional parts, but it may also be seen as parts including their spatial relations, e.g., the shape
composed of aspectual units. A more formal way to of a brick wall is based on the shapes of the bricks
express this is to say that the composition of a including their relative position.
whole, W, is a set, C W , of compositional parts, It is also of interest to be able to use different
P1 . . . PN ; such that C W s  P1 . . . PN 4 . The composi- geometric representation types for the same object,
tion, CA , of an aspectual unit, A, of W, is a subset of e.g., a tube could be represented by a block, a right
C W ; C W : CA . The union of the set of aspectual circular cylinder, or a centre axis. In a computer-
units is a subset of the complete set of compositional based representation a control mechanism is needed
parts. This relation between the different sets of to keep consistency among the attributes Žsee Fig. 7..

Fig. 6. Aspectual units related to the compositional whole and its compositional parts. The open dotted boxes in the schema are not standard
EXPRESS-G, but our way to illustrate that additional examples are possible.
 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328 325

Fig. 7. Schema representing the shape of a thing.

The constraints on the attributes of Composed cific level of modelling, one of the properties may be
Shape Žmarked U in Fig. 7. are as follows: space. In order to be useful, an information system
Ø The ‘part shapes’ attribute refers to the shapes of for spaces in buildings must fulfil certain require-
the part things of the composite thing. ments. It must be possible to define entities both for
Ø The ‘part relations’ attribute refers to the spatial a large space and for smaller spaces located within
relations among the part things of the composite that space, e.g., an apartment, and rooms within the
thing. apartment, as well as smaller spaces within a room.
A geometric representation item may describe a Openings in building parts must be possible to de-
solid as well as a void. The latter makes it possible fine. A building part’s surface or a smaller area of it
to define positions and dimensions of holes in things, towards the inside of a specific space must be distin-
to be filled out by opening components. It should be guishable, e.g., with the purpose to determine the
noted, however, that a hole is a property of the part area for wall-paper or paint.
where the opening component is situated, not of the A space in a building is an aspectual unit based
opening component. Similarly, a void is a spatial on a spatial view. A space may have other proper-
property of a thing, and the description of the void is ties, like surface material or air temperature, but the
part of the complete description of the thing’s shape. spatial properties are its basis for characterisation as
An example of how the schema in Fig. 7 would an aspectual unit. In building design, it must be
be used in practice is the design of a chimney for a possible to proceed in the way the designer wants,
house. At first, the shape and position of the chim- e.g., by first determining spatial properties and later
ney as a whole would be considered. At a later stage on other properties.
of design, the composition of the chimney would be Based on our analysis in the previous sections, a
considered. If it was to be made of bricks, its shape comprehensive schema for space information can be
would have to be revised to fit into the brick module designed Žsee Fig. 8.. This schema models the spaces
grid. This would be achieved by substituting or of a construction entity through the class construc-
combining the original shape object with another tion entity space. A construction entity space is an
which integrates the shapes and spatial relations of aspectual unit of a construction entity. The construc-
the composing bricks. tion entity and its aspectual units are composed of
construction entity parts. The construction entity
4.2. Principle structure of a schema of construction
space is composed of at least one enclosing element,
entity space
also an aspectual unit of the construction entity.
The most basic concepts in modelling the real Aspectual units are things with shape and spatial
world are ‘‘thing’’ and ‘‘property’’. In a more spe- relations to other entities of the same kind. The
326 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328

Fig. 8. Principle structure of a comprehensive schema of construction entity space.

shape of the construction entity space is based on the The schema allows a representation of different
shape of the enclosing elements and their spatial spaces based on the characteristics of their parts. For
relations. Examples of spatial relations are adjacent example an apartment consists of the apartment di-
to and surrounding. These relations allow, for exam- viders and a bathroom consists of the bathroom
ple, a combined representation of a set of adjacent boundaries, i.e., the enclosing parts making up the
spaces like a group of rooms that make up an apartment and the bathroom, respectively. Other ex-
apartment or an office. The relation surrounding amples are climate-protected space and fire-zones,
allows the representation of a larger space that incor- made up of external walls and fire-rated walls. In
porates smaller spaces, but where the larger space is this way any zone or region of the building and its
not necessarily completely filled by the smaller parts can be retrieved for analysis. In order to com-
spaces. Of course, a complete account of spatial pose a set of spaces into a larger space, e.g., a set of
relations that should be defined for a modelling rooms into an apartment, a set union operation would
system is outside the scope of this paper. The spatial be applied. The apartment is the union of the rooms,
relations used for construction entity spaces may also which means that although the rooms share some
be applied for enclosing elements or the user organi- walls these are only considered once in the opera-
sation. tion.
 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328 327

The inside of a room may be partly painted and entity spaces and user organisations located within
partly covered with wall-paper. The position and the spaces. For example, at an early stage of the
dimension of these surfaces are determined through design process it might be possible to determine the
the shape attributes of the enclosing element shape. floor area and position of a room, according to the
The position and dimensions of smaller voids that requirements from the activities for which the room
are not enclosed by material objects, within a room, is designed. This can be done without specification
can be determined in relation to some material refer- of other material properties, such as the parts that
ence frame, e.g., the space as a whole, or a wall or make up the room. The latter, such as walls, floors
floor. In general, all geometric properties of spaces and ceilings, can be specified at a later stage when
and enclosing parts are represented by the shape the overall configuration of the building’s spaces is
entity and its attributes. better known. The co-ordination is achieved through
The schema allows a representation of both fac- the relation between the space geometry, specifically
tual and experienced space. The former exists inde- its void, and activity geometry entities.
pendently of our experience, while the latter depends Further research will show how our schema can
on an experiencing subject; experienced space is a be implemented. Of specific interest may be to study
mutual property of an observer and the experienced applications for the earliest stages of the design
thing. Experienced space can be based on factual process, when the requirements from the user organi-
space but can also be freely invented or imagined. sation is transformed into properties of the building’s
The former is more objective since it is based on the spaces. Other applications are of interest as well,
factual properties of things, while the latter is more e.g., in the facility management stage, when much of
subjective. For example, the fact that a cave or a the information about the building is connected with
greenhouse is experienced as an enclosed space is its spaces.
based on the factually enclosing properties of the
cave’s and greenhouse’s walls.
Experienced space may be less objective but still 5. Conclusions
common to the general observer. For example, a
room in a building may be divided into two parts by In the introduction of this article we referred to
a vault, air and people may pass from one part of the ¨
Bjork’s statement about the dilemma in many prod-
room to another; this space may be experienced as uct models of reconciling a material and construction
two separate spaces, that can be used for separate methods view with a space-centred view on the
activities. For these reasons it may be decided to building. In this article we have shown a way to
handle them as separate rooms in a building pro- solve the dilemma by, on the one hand, developing a
gramme. In order to fully define such experienced comprehensive definition of space for the construc-
spaces, we need a means to define the non-material tion context, and on the other hand, developing the
boundaries of the spaces. In this example the defini- concept of aspectual unit which makes it possible to
tion that would produce the missing space boundary integrate different aspect views in the same concep-
could be connected with the vault. Generally, objec- tual schema.
tive experienced properties, common to many or all The dualism of concepts to both refer and repre-
humans, are reasonable to treat as factual properties, sent has been discussed in the article. Here is not the
if we are aware of the limitations of such an assump- place to consider the consequences for conceptual
tion. modelling and formal definitions. But, the dilemma
The relation between the user organisation and of reconciling the material and construction method
construction entity space is illustrated in the schema viewpoint with the space-centred viewpoint may in
by the relation ‘‘located in’’. The user organisation our view be traced back to this duality: space is a
is a thing, since it is composed of things like persons material thing with spatial properties.
and tools, its spatial properties can be represented In order to enable the combined views we have
through this schema as well. Spatial layout design also introduced the concept of aspectual unit. An
deals with spatial co-ordination between construction aspectual unit is composed of a subset of the parts of
328 A. Ekholm, S. FridqÕistr Automation in Construction 9 (2000) 315–328

a more complex whole. Its properties are identified ŽEd.., Proc. CIB W78 Workshop, Construction on the Infor-
through a specific view, or aspect, on the whole. We mation Highway, Bled, Slovenia, 1996.
w9x A. Ekholm, S. Fridqvist, A dynamic information system for
have shown a principle for integrating different as-
¨
design applied to the construction context, in: B.-C. Bjork,
pect views in a comprehensive schema useful in, for ¨
A. Jagbeck ŽEds.., Proc. CIB W78 Conference, The Life-
example, the context of concurrent design. Cycle of IT Innovations, Royal Institute of Technology,
Accordingly, a construction entity space is an Stockholm, 1998.
w10x Industry Foundation Classes — Release 1.0, International
aspectual unit based on a spatial view on the con-
Alliance for Interoperability, 1996.
struction entity. It is composed of enclosing ele- w11x Industry Foundation Classes — Release 1.5, International
ments, a subset of the construction entity parts. The Alliance for Interoperability, 1997.
spatial properties of a space, e.g., the geometry of its w12x ISO Technical Report 14177:1994ŽE., Classification of infor-
void, is represented in our schema as a shape at- mation in the construction industry, International Organiza-
tribute of the space. The user organisation and the tion for Standardization, Geneva, 1994.
w13x ISO 10303-1:1994ŽE., Industrial automation systems and
building are separate entities, each with spatial prop- integration — Product data representation and exchange:
erties of their own. A user organisation may use a Part 1. Overview and fundamental principles, International
construction entity, and may be located in a construc- Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 1994.
tion entity space. w14x ISO 10303-42:1994ŽE., Industrial automation systems and
integration — Product data representation and exchange:
Part 42. Integrated generic resources: Geometric and topolog-
ical representation, International Organization for Standard-
Acknowledgements ization, Geneva, 1994.
w15x ISO TC184 SC4 WG3 N496, Building construction core
This research has been financed by the Swedish model, BCCM, ISO 10303, International Organization for
National Council for Building Research. Standardization, Geneva, 1996.
w16x ISOrCD 12006-2 Building construction — Organisation of
information about construction works: Part 2. Framework for
classification of information, Draft ISO Standard, 20th May
References 1997, NBS Services, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1997.
w17x ISOrTC59rSC13 N75E, Building Construction — Organi-
w1x B.-C. Bjork,
¨ A conceptual model of spaces, space boundaries sation of information about construction works, Report by
and enclosing structures, Automation in Construction 3 Ž1. Working Group 3 of ISOrTC59rSC13, Norges Byggstan-
Ž1994. 193–214. ˚ 1997.
dardiseringsrad,
w2x M. Bunge, Semantics I: Sense and Reference, Vol. 1, Trea- w18x M. Jammer, Concepts of Space, Harvard Univ. Press, Cam-
tise on Basic Philosophy, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1974. bridge, MA, 1969.
w3x M. Bunge, Ontology I: The Furniture of the World, Vol. 3, w19x M.L. Maher, S.J. Simoff, J. Mitchell, Formalising building
Treatise on Basic Philosophy, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1977. requirements using an activityrspace model, Automation in
w4x M. Bunge, Ontology II: A World of Systems, Vol. 4, Trea- Construction 2 Ž6. Ž1997. 77–95.
tise on Basic Philosophy, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1979. w20x S. van Nederveen, COMBINE Task 2 Final Report, TNO
w5x The Collins Dictionary and Thesaurus in One Volume, Building and Construction Research, Delft, 1996.
Collins, London, 1987. w21x E. Neufert, Architect’s data, Blackwell, Oxford, 1994.
w6x C.M. Eastman, A. Siabiris, A generic building product model w22x J. Piaget, B. Inhelder, The Child’s Conception of Space,
incorporating building type information, Automation in Con- Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1956.
struction 4 Ž3. Ž1995. 283–304. w23x D.A. Schenck, P.R. Wilson, Information Modelling: The
w7x A. Ekholm, A conceptual framework for classification of EXPRESS Way, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1994.
construction works, Electronic Journal of Information Tech- w24x K. Svensson, Integrating facilities management information,
nology in Construction ŽITcon., Vol. 1, Royal Institute of PhD Thesis, Department of Construction Management and
Technology, Stockholm, 1996, URL: http:rritcon.org. Economics, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, 1998.
w8x A. Ekholm, S. Fridqvist, Modelling of user organisations, w25x Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, G&C Merriam,
buildings and spaces for the design process, in: Z. Turk Springfield, MA, 1995.